This series is written by a private citizen with an abiding interest in U.S. history and particularly its founding documents: The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution.

* * *

The word “welfare” appears twice in the Constitution. Once in the preamble with the verb, “promote” and again in Art. I, Sec. 8, with the verb “provide.”

Knowing that the Founding Fathers used their words carefully, there must have been a reason for the two different verbs used.

In the Preamble, it would appear to be less specific and to apply as a general concept. In Art. I, Sec, 8, the use of the verb “provide” must relate to the 17 areas of responsibility of the federal government delineated in that article. Thus, it is specific as to what is required to “provide for . . . the general welfare” of the country.

According to recent reports, transfer payments – forms of government “welfare” – have now reached the point where we, the people, are receiving more in welfare payments than we are paying in taxes! Viewed in a slightly different perspective, we have also reached the point where approximately 50 percent of our population receives welfare paid for by the other 50 percent. Thus, it would appear that the productive members of society are supporting the non-productive members!

So, whose welfare are we talking about in the Constitution?

Because the government was “federal” and not “national,” there is a further dimension to the use of the word, “welfare.” As a federal government it can only be concerned with the whole which consists of the 50 states and not the population therein. The population of any given state is the responsibility of the individual state and not the federal government.

However, what is generally missed and perhaps avoided since it encumbers the attempts to pervert the original intent and meaning, is the fact that the clause, even when applied, is with respect to the states, not the individual citizens.

Both the preamble and the body use the words United States. The original drafting of the Constitution listed all 13 colonies (subsequently termed states). But, at least so far as this writer has been able to unearth, never was there a reference to the individual citizens. There was, of course, a good reason why this would be true. The delegates were there representing their individual colonies and were expected to protect the sovereignty and independence of their respective states. It was left up to each state to govern and provide a constitution for its citizens in keeping with the federal one. No state could abrogate the federal constitution.

However, any state could deny the federal government encroachment on its territory or sovereignty by invoking the 9th and 10th Amendments.

Looking at the Income Tax Amendment, an interesting question arises. All monies collected by the federal government from whatever source are to be used for either the enumerated activities of Art. I, Sec. 8 or to provide for the general welfare as it relates to such powers. Therefore, how does the IRS justify the taking of monies from the citizens when the money is obviously going to special interests, foreign governments, pork barrel legislation or “welfare” that serves only a limited segment of the population? This smacks of fraud (with a capital “F”) by definition! If the reasoning is correct and the application of the sections of the Constitution pertain, then there can be no question but what we are constantly being deceived by the IRS with the IRS acting as an enforcer of such deception.

Don’t stop paying your taxes but remember that the foundation of this great country needs to be reestablished and reinforced so that all of us can enjoy the fruits of our labors without government interference and usurpation of our privacy.

That’s my view. What’s yours? Contact me at
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it